Comparison of prevention, control and intervention strategies for AMR infections through multidisciplinary studies, including One Health approaches
1. Aim of the call
In order to protect and prolong the usefulness of existing antimicrobials, increasing cross-sectoral efforts are needed to rationalize their use and misuse in human and animal health and food production settings. Key measures to achieve this are to improve existing and implement new evidence-based control, prevention, stewardship and intervention strategies to reduce the risk of acquisition, development and transmission of antibiotic-resistant bacteria and infection caused by these pathogens, in hospitalized patients, outpatients, healthy people, animals and the environment.
Despite significant investments in research and increased knowledge about the development, acquisition, occurrence, and transmission pathways of AMR, little of this research has translated into interventions to significantly improve health care by reducing improper antibiotic usage or infections by resistant microbes. Furthermore, much of what has been recommended as interventions to control AMR has been based on experience, empiricism, and common sense, rather than strong evidence. Consequently, the evidence-base for key interventions including detection, screening, isolation, decolonization, environmental decontamination, and antibiotic stewardship remains weak. The lack of sufficient evidence-based research is a problem in veterinary and agriculture science too, which has limited prospects for new antibiotics and therefore, interventions to enable lowering antibiotic usage in animal husbandry are vital.
It is a formidable challenge to decrease the misuse of antibiotics as well as to implement measures to block transmission of AMR in humans and animals. Cultural, contextual and behavioral determinants influence antibiotics use and may also determine interventions which are most cost-effective and/or can be successfully implemented.
In summary, controlled integrated studies between human population, health care systems, and agricultural settings, multiple sectors are urgently needed to devise the optimal intervention strategies across diverse cultural settings and heterogeneous systems of human health and animal health and food production.
Only multinational projects will be funded. Each proposal must involve a minimum of three (3) countries participating in this call and a maximum of six (6) project participants with maximum of one (1) or two (2) participants from each country (see 2.1 Eligibility criteria for further details).
Please note that for countries: Belgium, Germany, Italy, Latvia and Romania there may be only one (1) participant per project, whereas for Canada, Ireland, Israel, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland there may be up to two (2) partners per project.
1.1 Call Topics:
One Health oriented pilot studies to determine feasibility and protocols for future large scale multi-center and multi-national studies of different prevention or intervention strategies designed to prevent AMR infections in community, health care, agricultural and environmental settings. The One Health approach is encouraged, but not mandatory.
Compared effectiveness and economic evaluation of the implementation of new and/or more cost-effective methods for rapid detection and diagnosis of infections by multi-drug resistant microorganisms (MDR) for the purpose of identification of appropriate therapy, transmission routes or early detection of outbreaks in different settings.
Investigations of efficacy and effectiveness of behavioral intervention strategies, public awareness strategies or other stewardship strategies aiming at reducing the use and misuse of antibiotics and the development and transfer of AMR.
Assessment of new methods to improve and raise hygiene and sanitation standards to reduce infections in health and care settings.
For all of the above: Special emphasis on low and middle-income countries and a One Health perspective or partnership is encouraged but subject to the scope and mandate of national funding agencies participating in the call (See specific national requirements).
1.2 Expected Impact:
It is expected that through international collaborations that combine complementary and synergistic research strengths, this JPIAMR call will increase the understanding of prevention, control, stewardship and intervention strategies for AMR infections. Proposals are expected to clearly define targets and milestones to deliver relevant outcomes within the funding period.
2. Application: 2.1 Eligibility
Applicants must adhere to the specific regulations of the national funding organisations. Each transnational consortium submitting a proposal must involve:
a maximum of six (6) project partners. However, consortia including partners from Latvia, Poland or Romania may increase the total number of partners to seven (7), in order to increase representation of these countries in JPI AMR projects.
a maximum of one or two partners from a participating country per project (please see above and national eligibility criteria).
Project participants not eligible to be funded (e.g. from non-funding countries or not fundable according to national/regional regulations of the participating funding countries) may be involved in projects if they secure their own funding and if their expertise is indispensable for reaching the objectives. However, the maximum number of six (6) participants may not be exceeded, unless partners from Latvia, Poland or Romania are included.
The consortia should always consist of a majority of funded project participants. The budget of a non-funded partner shall not exceed 30% of total transnational project budget requested.
Project duration may be max 36 months.
2.2Submission of joint transnational proposal
Submissions of proposals will be in two steps. In both cases, one joint proposal document (in English, and following the provided template) shall be prepared by the project participants of a joint transnational proposal, and must be submitted to the Joint Call Secretariat by the coordinator. A submission tool will be implemented in the JPIAMR website.
The two-steps application process (pre-proposal, full proposal) will have the following timetable:
January 18th, 2017 Publication of the JPIAMR ERA-NET 2017 Call
March 21st, 2017 (17:00 CET) Submission deadline for pre-proposals
Mid May 2017 Full proposal invitations send to project coordinators
July 4th, 2017 (17:00 CET) Submission deadline for full proposals
October/November 2017 Final funding decision announced to applicants1
End of 2017/Early 2018 Start of funding
2.3Financial modalities and funding prerequisites
Funding is granted for a maximum of three years in accordance with national regulations. Applicants must refer and adhere to their own specific national regulations and scientific remits as detailed in the National and Regional Requirements (see Annex B).
The funds provided by the Parties are listed in the table below. The “virtual common pot model” shall apply for this transnational call. As such, each country will fund its own approved project partners. The proposals will be funded following the ranking list recommended by the Peer Review Panel.
Anticipated funding provided by each party
Each funded consortium should provide a consortium agreement (CA) signed by all participants. The project consortium is strongly encouraged to sign this CA before the start of the project to clarify the potential IPR matters (such as licensing in, licensing out, patent and exploitation strategy), and in any case no later than six months after the official project start date. The points that must be addressed in the CA are detailed in the Annex C.
The only official communication line of the proposal is between the Joint Call Secretariat and the project coordinator. The project coordinator will be the person contacted by the Joint Call Secretariat during the application procedure, so he/she must forward this information to other participants. Each funding organization has national contact persons who can be contacted for information about the specific national requirements (see Annex A).
Please note that country specific requirements might apply to this call. Compliance with the national/regional regulations specified in the country specific information is mandatory (See Annex B). We strongly advise you to contact your national/regional representative prior to submitting a pre- proposal.
Pre-proposals and full proposals will be assessed according to specific evaluation criteria (see below), using a common evaluation form. A scoring system from 0 to 5 will be used to evaluate the proposal’s performance with respect to the different evaluation criteria.
0: Failure. The proposal fails to address the criterion in question, or cannot be judged because of missing
or incomplete information.
1: Poor. The proposal shows serious weaknesses in relation to the criterion in question.
2: Fair. The proposal generally addresses the criterion, but there are significant weaknesses that need corrections.
3: Good. The proposal addresses the criterion in question well but certain improvements are necessary. 4: Very good. The proposal addresses the criterion very well, but small improvements are possible.
5: Excellent. The proposal successfully addresses all aspects of the criterion in question.
Clarity and pertinence of the objectives
Soundness of the concept
Competence and experience of participating research partners in the field(s) of the proposal (previous work in the field, specific technical expertise)
Potential of the expected results for future clinical, public health and/or other socio-economic
health relevant applications including patients’ needs
Added-value of transnational collaboration: gathering a critical mass of patients/biological
material, sharing of resources (models, databases, diagnosis etc.), harmonization of data,
sharing of specific know-how and/or innovative technologies.
Effectiveness of the proposed measures to exploit and disseminate the project results (including
management of IPR), to communicate the project, and to manage research data where relevant
Industry and Patient Organization participation/engagement (when appropriate/applicable)
3. Quality and efficiency of the implementation
Coherence and effectiveness of the work plan, including appropriateness of the allocation of tasks, resources and time-frame
Appropriateness of the management structures and procedures, including risk and innovation
Concept for sustainability of infrastructures initiated by the project
Budget and cost-effectiveness of the project (rational distribution of resources in relation to
project’s activities, partners responsibilities and time frame)
Sub-criteria 2a and 2b will be prioritized for assessing the impact of proposals (pre- and full proposal stage).
Evaluation scores will be awarded for the 3 main criteria, and not singularly for the different aspects listed below the criteria. The threshold for individual criteria will be 3. The maximum score that can be reached from all three criteria together is 15 points.
If two projects receive the same final score and the same score for excellence, a project including a partner from Latvia, Poland or Romania should have a priority in considering for funding.
4. Reporting requirements and other obligations of JPIAMR grantees
Each partner will be funded through national grants from their respective funding agency. National reporting requirements apply according to the national rules of each specific country (See Country- specific information).
In addition, grantees have an obligation to submit progress and final scientific reports to the JPIAMR Joint Call Secretariat according to “JPIAMR Guidelines for Applicants and Grant Holders” and supply the JPIAMR with updated information of the consortium and its results for promotion of the call.
All dissemination of results from the funded projects should acknowledge funding from the JPIAMR. Coordinators are expected to participate in and contribute to JPIAMR workshops and other events associated with this call.
For more information please see “JPI AMR Guidelines for Applicants and Grant Holders” (www.jpiamr.eu).
( TRUNCATED --- please visit the public link for full proposal text)